4 ms·

Commenters have seemed to miss that this phone isn't designed for the "90%" that don't have WiFi. This isn't designed for African villages where electricity is

Commenters have seemed to miss that this phone isn't designed for the "90%" that don't have WiFi. This isn't designed for African villages where electricity is spotty and LTE is non-existent. This is designed for tech-savvy parts of the world that care about having cloud-connected phones with "infinite" storage. Anyone that takes thousands of photos on their 15MP phone cameras & 1080p/4K video knows the pain of phones with limited storage. It makes no sense to say a product sucks because it sucks for groups of people that it wasn't designed for in the first place.

scintill76 11y ago
> Anyone that takes thousands of photos on their 15MP phone cameras & 1080p/4K video knows the pain of phones with limited storage. This doesn't really address why "the cloud", dedicated hardware, or possibly even new software are needed. Doesn't something like Dropbox handle this? (Speaking as a non-photographer and non-Dropbox user... maybe I just won't "get it" on that aspect.) If not, why can't they just make a better app solution? And why does it have to use the cloud, as opposed to your system at home, or a local SD card? If your "infinite storage" is only 100GB (and that's a perk for Kickstarter backers only!), you can get that for less than $80 on an SD card!* If you're going to spend hundreds on a new phone to put your photos in the cloud, let's hope the camera you're stuck with is decent (they claim it is.) Judging by their $500k+ worth of funding in their first day on Kickstarter(!), they've managed to sell people on this, but I'm not sure it's really about the cloud syncing (there are "enthusiasts" who would buy just for fun, maybe people like the design, and the company is supposedly committed to updating the OS over time.) I think there's something about Kickstarter that gets people to buy something they wouldn't be jumping to buy if they just saw it in the phone store. But hey, if it makes money, who cares, I guess... * Possible caveat: I often see Android phones spec'd as 64GB max SD card size. I'm not sure if that's just the most they were tested with, it's a FAT filesystem limit, etc. But if that's an actual barrier, I'd still rather see kernel patches or hardware hacks like "paging" between two 64GB virtual cards before this.
rodgerd 11y ago
> the pain of phones with limited storage. I don't know that pain because SD cards are cheap. > This is designed for tech-savvy parts of the world Who never ever travel, apparently. I struggle to see why they're bothing to take thousands of photos, since they aren't doing anything.

scintill76 11y ago

> Anyone that takes thousands of photos on their 15MP phone cameras & 1080p/4K video knows the pain of phones with limited storage. This doesn't really address why "the cloud", dedicated hardware, or possibly even new software are needed. Doesn't something like Dropbox handle this? (Speaking as a non-photographer and non-Dropbox user... maybe I just won't "get it" on that aspect.) If not, why can't they just make a better app solution? And why does it have to use the cloud, as opposed to your system at home, or a local SD card? If your "infinite storage" is only 100GB (and that's a perk for Kickstarter backers only!), you can get that for less than $80 on an SD card!* If you're going to spend hundreds on a new phone to put your photos in the cloud, let's hope the camera you're stuck with is decent (they claim it is.) Judging by their $500k+ worth of funding in their first day on Kickstarter(!), they've managed to sell people on this, but I'm not sure it's really about the cloud syncing (there are "enthusiasts" who would buy just for fun, maybe people like the design, and the company is supposedly committed to updating the OS over time.) I think there's something about Kickstarter that gets people to buy something they wouldn't be jumping to buy if they just saw it in the phone store. But hey, if it makes money, who cares, I guess... * Possible caveat: I often see Android phones spec'd as 64GB max SD card size. I'm not sure if that's just the most they were tested with, it's a FAT filesystem limit, etc. But if that's an actual barrier, I'd still rather see kernel patches or hardware hacks like "paging" between two 64GB virtual cards before this.

rodgerd 11y ago

> the pain of phones with limited storage. I don't know that pain because SD cards are cheap. > This is designed for tech-savvy parts of the world Who never ever travel, apparently. I struggle to see why they're bothing to take thousands of photos, since they aren't doing anything.